We'll live. On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 05:16, Pepijn Van Eeckhoudt < [email protected]> wrote:
> I've been going through the specs and up until now all failures are related > to utime not behaving as expected on windows. I'm changing the specs so that > they don't rely on utime but use sleeps instead. This makes the specs much > more reliable (se linux doesn't allow mtime to be set in the past either > IIRC), at the cost of slightly slower execution due to the sleeps. Is this > acceptable? > > Pepijn >
